With such a provocative title, many people on both sides of the same-sex marriage debate shall likely be upset, but there should be no apologies for stating the facts, writes Michael Smyth
People have made the comment that Marriage is not exclusively a religious institution, but while this may be technically correct, it is a highly disingenuous statement. A friend of mine has pointed out that in the old Roman Republic, the State presided over ceremonies, but what he failed to point out - possibly out of genuine ignorance of history and the institution of the Cursus Honorum - is that the ceremonial head of the republic (or in modern political parlance, paramount leader) was an official known as the Pontifex Maximus. This Pontifex was head of all of the religions within the Roman Republic/Empire, and as such, when Constantine the Great converted to Christianity, Christianity was included in those religions which he presided over as Pontifex Maximus. This demonstrates that the State only authorised marriages permitted under those religions, not to mention the fact that Roman Law only recognised marriages between male and female Roman citizens.
Continue reading "Why liberals should oppose same-sex marriage" »
Recent Comments